@ RAZurrection

You like many others intentionally or not misread their comments. It's generally accepted that Naughty Dog with Uncharted 2 pushes the Cell's SPUs more than the awesome Metal Gear Solid 4 did, but Naughty Dog states:

"But now we have to go into all of those routines and optimize them so we that can get even more done using that Cell processor. It really feels that sometimes it's this bottomless pit of processing power"

It seems nomatter how often developers clarify their comments, certain fans hold onto their misbelieves (they responded to such misconceptions before and before that I basically told the same as they did in reply to that topic)...

RAZurrection said:   MikeB said: That's near impossible, that would take too many manyears to accomplish. Since Naughty Dog, Hideo Kojima have already done so by their own admission, I don't see how. MikeB said: There are huge gains to be made with re-writing parts of an engine in assembler code, usually coders first start with time critical parts. To fully hand optimise an entire game engine would require far too many manyears for the team of coders Crytek has.   I imagine they'll enhance it to the point where they reach diminishing returns, which since it seems visually and technically beyond all other games (except perhaps Rage) revealed or released is fine. MikeB said: Crytek is still hiring SPU programmers, if what you said would be the case, why would they? They say the power needle is at the limit, seems like they need all the help they can get. They want to sell their engine after all, maybe they thought Sony could do without another UE3 repeat.

dood, processing at 100% is not optimized to 100%, the second one is nearly impossible these days even on a Nintendo DS.

enhance+optimize, enhance is adding new features, optimize will lead to enhancements, which will result in even better looking games, this is the basics of making games on consoles no matter which one you are working on.

yeah, still higher potential than the 360 though, even without optimizing atm, the PS3 demo of CE3 looked quiet a bit more impressive than the 360 one tbh, I really really want to see the PC one, the PC version would be so much more superior haha.

Nice MikeB, still tho, reading that phrack article on programming for the ps3 makes me understand why people hate it. He got that quote from some manual, I'd kill for that source book.  It may be easier now to build from the ground up too but there's no good reason why Sony should have abandoned x86 or more typical PowerPC architectures so readily.  But the difficulty programming from the cell is still a problem beyond the normal difficulties of parallelism given each SPU only has access to their onboard memory so you have to deal with segmenting the data for DMA.

My argument isn't about theoretical performance, in which the ps3 would clearly win.  It's about actual performance given the time and cost restraints on developers.  Unreal Tournament and COD ran in much higher resolution with better AA and AF on my PC built around ps3 launch than my ps3 even before I overclocked the shit out of it.  And 3 years later the ps3 caught up with optimization and tweaks only to find PC hardware outpaced it.  For 600 dollars now I can build a Crysis monster. 

If you built the cpu at launch of the ps3 you could have a better system for 600 dollars but it takes some deal shopping.  PS3 still can't hit native 720p rendering in most games.  This ignores the RAM limitations that leads to other problems, like missing horse armor.  If you just buy without shopping though or get it from Dell you're right though, it ends up costing more.  And now that they got the tweaks the ps3 can rival those era computers in exclusive games optimized to pieces, but at the time it didn't really shine like that and most devs can't afford that apart from Sony.

Lastly, let's not forget that console devs use tricks to up the graphics.  Think KZ2 corridor shooting.  Draw distance is a bitch.

CGI-Quality said: dahuman said: RAZurrection said:   MikeB said: That's near impossible, that would take too many manyears to accomplish. Since Naughty Dog, Hideo Kojima have already done so by their own admission, I don't see how. MikeB said: There are huge gains to be made with re-writing parts of an engine in assembler code, usually coders first start with time critical parts. To fully hand optimise an entire game engine would require far too many manyears for the team of coders Crytek has.   I imagine they'll enhance it to the point where they reach diminishing returns, which since it seems visually and technically beyond all other games (except perhaps Rage) revealed or released is fine. MikeB said: Crytek is still hiring SPU programmers, if what you said would be the case, why would they? They say the power needle is at the limit, seems like they need all the help they can get. They want to sell their engine after all, maybe they thought Sony could do without another UE3 repeat. dood, processing at 100% is not optimized to 100%, the second one is nearly impossible these days even on a Nintendo DS. enhance+optimize, enhance is adding new features, optimize will lead to enhancements, which will result in even better looking games, this is the basics of making games on consoles no matter which one you are working on. yeah, still higher potential than the 360 though, even without optimizing atm, the PS3 demo of CE3 looked quiet a bit more impressive than the 360 one tbh, I really really want to see the PC one, the PC version would be so much more superior haha. It was, although it was slight. One of the reasons they say their engine will run a little better on PS3 is because it's physics-heavy.

Having to support the 360 will probably lead to sacrifices. For example they may have wanted more onscreen activity, something the PS3 is technically capable of providing. But of course you can't have such huge game design differences between versions. Therefor I think it's more likely it's going to be more minor differences like an extra special effect here or there.

MikeB said: CGI-Quality said: dahuman said: RAZurrection said:   MikeB said: That's near impossible, that would take too many manyears to accomplish. Since Naughty Dog, Hideo Kojima have already done so by their own admission, I don't see how. MikeB said: There are huge gains to be made with re-writing parts of an engine in assembler code, usually coders first start with time critical parts. To fully hand optimise an entire game engine would require far too many manyears for the team of coders Crytek has.   I imagine they'll enhance it to the point where they reach diminishing returns, which since it seems visually and technically beyond all other games (except perhaps Rage) revealed or released is fine. MikeB said: Crytek is still hiring SPU programmers, if what you said would be the case, why would they? They say the power needle is at the limit, seems like they need all the help they can get. They want to sell their engine after all, maybe they thought Sony could do without another UE3 repeat. dood, processing at 100% is not optimized to 100%, the second one is nearly impossible these days even on a Nintendo DS. enhance+optimize, enhance is adding new features, optimize will lead to enhancements, which will result in even better looking games, this is the basics of making games on consoles no matter which one you are working on. yeah, still higher potential than the 360 though, even without optimizing atm, the PS3 demo of CE3 looked quiet a bit more impressive than the 360 one tbh, I really really want to see the PC one, the PC version would be so much more superior haha. It was, although it was slight. One of the reasons they say their engine will run a little better on PS3 is because it's physics-heavy. Having to support the 360 will probably lead to sacrifices. For example they may have wanted more onscreen activity, something the PS3 is technically capable of providing. But of course you can't have such huge game design differences between versions. Therefor I think it's more likely it's going to be more minor differences like an extra special effect here or there.

dood, did you see the outdoor draw distance though? and the amount of trees? that's the most impressive thing I've seen on consoles lol, I literally went "holy shit that's actually crysis level on a console!" and when they showed the bridge demo with water physics too, impressive shit on a console lol.

oobob said: Nice MikeB, still tho, reading that phrack article on programming for the ps3 makes me understand why people hate it. He got that quote from some manual, I'd kill for that source book.  It may be easier now to build from the ground up too but there's no good reason why Sony should have abandoned x86 or more typical PowerPC architectures so readily.  But the difficulty programming from the cell is still a problem beyond the normal difficulties of parallelism given each SPU only has access to their onboard memory so you have to deal with segmenting the data for DMA. If you built the cpu at launch of the ps3 you could have a better system for 600 dollars but it takes some deal shopping.  PS3 still can't hit native 720p rendering in most games.  This ignores the RAM limitations that leads to other problems, like missing horse armor.  If you just buy without shopping though or get it from Dell you're right though, it ends up costing more.  And now that they got the tweaks the ps3 can rival those era computers in exclusive games optimized to pieces, but at the time it didn't really shine like that and most devs can't afford that apart from Sony. Assembly is much more fun than Java...I was in undergrad when Java had replaced lower level stuff and I had to learn C/C++ in electives or on my own.  It didn't even count for the CS major!  I faced it once otherwise as part of a CS II project...where we had to interface C with java.  I started on basic for an apple IIC+ so I may just enjoy assembly because I missed goto.

yes, the major problem with these "HD" (lol) consoles is that they suffer from low memory so their resolution also goto shit, the PS3 really could have benefitted much more from a higher amount of memory and that's a major bottleneck on consoles in general.

you could have gotten something prolly more powerful back in 2006 if you only use the 600 on upgrades instead of a brand new machine, I've always been a system builder as well so I always watch the prices, to have built-in wifi, gigabite ethernet, blu ray drive on a machine back in those days would sky rocket the price of a PC when you combine all the parts, it's not so much the performance, but the total package deal, and don't forget laptop HDD also costs more, especially back then, the memory part does confuse me though, that's the dirt cheap part, they just needed about 512 system memory instead of 256 for a tiny bit more and it would be an entirely different game imo.

Java is such shit lol, I hate it, it's literally an emulator language and it's ridiculous, I'd rather compile seperate C/C++ binaries with some modding than ever using Java personally, but hey, we are moving to web based shit these days where shit like google OS would be useless without internet... sigh.... fuck those netbooks.

 

edit: to your edit, that's actually what I like about consoles lol.

FKNetwork said: BladeOfGod said: FKNetwork said: BladeOfGod said: We can only be sure of that when we see a game on 360 that looks better than Uncharted 2 :) Not long then seeing as Crysis is just around the corner for both platforms, already looks better (graphically) than unchartered 2 :) On PC yes, on consoles HELL NO You need glasses!

OUCH, great argument. you showed me

MikeB said: @ RAZurrection It seems nomatter how often developers clarify their comments, certain fans hold onto their misbelieves...

Well that article is only 2 days old, I hadn't seen it yet.

Still good news right? Since Crytek have seemingly found the limits to the Cell, then assuredly there are no excuses for Crysis 2 to look the same as the 360 version of Crysis 2, let alone worse.

dahuman said: dood, processing at 100% is not optimized to 100%, the second one is nearly impossible these days even on a Nintendo DS.

If it's applicable to every system, then I'm not sure what needs to be said about it. Infinite optimisation as long as you have the time, but you can't turn a DS into a 360 no matter how long the development.

CGI-Quality said: Which has nothing to do with anything.

Oh I just wondered if you were aware they had downgraded it again since I can see you are a fan.

CGI-Quality said: As for being attacked, spare me. Nobody attacked you.

Uh you basically lashed out because I suspect you are insecure.

dahuman said: enhance+optimize, enhance is adding new features, optimize will lead to enhancements, which will result in even better looking games, this is the basics of making games on consoles no matter which one you are working on.

Common sense, another 2 years of development yields slightly better results. But surely you realise also that there comes a point, which has come and gone where improvements become too small to be worth the trouble. Diminishing returns.

dahuman said: yeah, still higher potential than the 360 though, even without optimizing atm, the PS3 demo of CE3 looked quiet a bit more impressive than the 360 one tbh, I really really want to see the PC one, the PC version would be so much more superior haha.

Well I don't know what footage you saw I was more referring to:

1) The Fact they show twice as much 360 footage as ps3 footage

2) Digital Foundry declared the most intensive footage was on 360, because it could run it better

3) Cevat Yerli saying the 360 would be better on the graphics as the PS3 was "the lowest denominator for a lot of people"

MikeB said: Having to support the 360 will probably lead to sacrifices. For example they may have wanted more onscreen activity, something the PS3 is technically capable of providing. But of course you can't have such huge game design differences between versions. Therefor I think it's more likely it's going to be more minor differences like an extra special effect here or there.

According to this, it was only a recent breakthrough that stopped the PS3 from compromising the console release full stop.

 

Damn!

more space on disc. can't complain on that.
a fast processor. no copmlaints there either.

thats all folks

@ RAZurrection

Food for thought:

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/10/26/is-gears-of-war-as-good-as-it-gets/

So it's not the first time we heard such sounds from game company PR machines.